Right-click on the border of each of these notes to highlight it and move it to the side for editing and/or delete it before printing.

Be sure to submit of copy of the original Notice CP501 (as EXHIBIT A) with your letter.

Notary signature and stamp required.

Instructions

To prepare your materials, obtain two (2) large (9 x 12) envelopes, ten (10) mailing labels (no larger than 1” x 3.75”), and, from your local post office, two (2) green certified mail return receipts and two (2) green and white certified mail receipts, and make two copies of the Notice CP501.

To preserve the original, save this document before making any changes, and then resave the document with a new name once you have made changes (i.e., 000000 Rebuttal to 000000 Notice CP501, where the two “000000” symbols represent a six digit date for the date of this rebuttal and the date of Notice CP501 itself).

To prepare your letter, replace the yellow-highlighted items with your information (several items), turn off the highlights for all items, fill in certified mail #s (to the right of each addressee on the first and second pages—use the twenty-digit number on each green and white certified mail receipt—print a copy of this letter for each recipient plus one for yourself, and Notarize all copies (on the second-to-last page).

To prepare your envelopes, be sure to coordinate each certified mail # on the letter with the certified mail # on the corresponding green and white receipt and each of 3 labels for each addressee.  Copy and paste your return address from the letter, print 2 return address labels for each recipient, and paste a return address label on the return address side (“Sender:  Please print your name ….”) of each green certified mail return receipt.  Then copy and paste each addressee from the first and second pages of the letter and print 3 labels for each addressee.  Next paste an addressee label in Box 1 (“Article Addressed to:”) of a green certified mail return receipt, paste a corresponding addressee label to the corresponding green and white certified mail receipt (verify the addressee and the certified mail # as it appears on the letter), and paste the certified mail # label from the green and white certified mail receipt in Box 2 (“Article Number”) of the green certified mail return receipt (also be sure the “Certified Mail” box is checked in Box 3 (“Service Type”)).  Finally, paste the green certified mail return receipt, centered vertically, with its top at the left edge of an envelope, paste a return address label half on the perforated tear-off section of the return receipt and half on the envelope, paste the corresponding green and white certified mail receipt, centered horizontally, with its bar code at the top edge of the envelope, and paste the remaining corresponding addressee label below the green and white certified mail receipt.  Repeat these steps for all addressees.

To fill your envelopes, place a Notarized copy of the letter followed by a copy of the Notice CP501 (“Exhibit A”) followed by the “Exhibits on CD available on request” page (the last page of the letter) in each envelope, and then seal each envelope.

To mail your envelopes, visit your local post office (a postal clerk must process certified mail through the postal computer system).  When they arrive in your mailbox, keep for your records the return receipts along with a Notarized copy of the letter and the original Notice CP501.  (A three-ring binder is recommended for this purpose.) 

You should complete this process within thirty days of the original date of the Notice CP501 to prevent levy of bank accounts and paychecks.

REPORT OF UNLAWFUL INTERNAL
REVENUE SERVICE ACTIONS
OFFICIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST UNKNOWN REVENUE AGENT 
RE: NOTICE OF INTENT TO LEVY
From:
First M. Last
Mailing Address
City, State (no abbrev.) 00000
To:
Scott Bessent
Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service
llll Constitution Avenue NW

Be sure this address 
is exactly the same as the address of the Notice CP501 originating office.  (Right-click on the border of this note to highlight it and delete this note before printing and enclosing in the envelope.)

Washington, DC 20224	Certified Mail #7006 0100 0001 0583 9699
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
(City, State, Zip)	Certified Mail #7006 0100 0001 0583 9705
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
Dear Commissioner and Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service:
I, First M. Last, hereinafter Declarant, state that the facts contained herein are true and correct to the best of Declarant's firsthand knowledge and belief pursuant to the laws of united States of America.
This letter is lawful notification and is sent pursuant to the federal Constitution, specifically, the Bill of Rights, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments, and pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to Declarant specific to the subject matter.  Your failure to respond, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, everything in this letter with which you disagree is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal, lawful, and fully binding upon you in any court in America without your protest or objection or that of those who represent you.  Your silence is your acquiescence.  See:  Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391.  Notification of legal responsibility is “the first essential of due process of law”.  See also:  U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d. 297:  “Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.”

Be sure to submit of copy of the original Notice CP501 (as EXHIBIT A) with your letter.  (Right-click on the border of this note to highlight it and delete this note before printing and enclosing in the envelope.)

Declarant has received your collection Notice CP 501 dated 5-21-2007; a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT A.
Declarant has never been established as a “Taxpayer” pursuant to Botta v. Scanlon.
In the case of Botta v. Scanlon, 288 F.2d. 504 (1961) it states:
An assessment of penalty for willful failure to collect or to pay over a tax against one who is not obligated to collect or pay over the tax would be inconsistent with equity, due process, or justice.  26 USCA (IRC 1954) section 6671(b), 6672.
Tax officials are not vested with the absolute power of assessment against individuals not specified in the statutes as persons liable for tax without opportunity for judicial review of status before persons’ property is seized and sold, and same is true where liability is asserted as penalty for willful act.  26 USCA (IRC 1954) section 6671(b), 6672.
... in Adler v. Nicholas, 10 Cir., 1948, 166 F.2d. 674, 678 … “It is equally well settled that the Revenue laws related only to taxpayers.  No procedure is prescribed for a non-taxpayer where the Government seeks to levy on property belonging to him for the collection of another’s tax, and no attempt has been made to annul the ordinary rights or remedies of a non-taxpayer in such cases.  If the Government sought to levy on the property of A for a tax liability owing by B, A could not and would not be required to pay the tax under protest and then institute an action to recover the amount so paid.  His remedy would be to go into a court of competent jurisdiction and enjoin the Government from proceeding against his property.
Plaintiffs may or may not be able to allege facts showing that Section 7421 is inapplicable to them.  However, a reasonable construction of the taxing statutes does not include vesting any tax official with absolute power of assessment against individuals not specified in the statutes as persons liable for the tax without an opportunity for judicial review of this status before the appellation of “taxpayer” is bestowed upon them and their property is seized and sold.
Declarant has never had a “judicial determination” that Declarant is a taxpayer pursuant to Botta v. Scanlon.  Any references to Declarant as a “taxpayer” are false until such time as Declarant has a judicial review and a court of law makes that determination.  Declarant requests that you refrain from referring to Declarant as a “taxpayer.”
Declarant has reviewed the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, everything that the code is based upon, and noted that the laws have been repealed as referenced in that code as “AN ACT”, the very beginning of the code; a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT B, and states:
Sec. 4.  Repeal and Savings provisions.—
(a)	The Internal Revenue Title, as hereinafter set forth, is intended to include all general laws of the United States and parts of such laws, relating exclusively to internal revenue, in force on the 2d day of January 1939 (1) of a permanent nature and (2) of a temporary nature if embraced in said Internal Revenue Title.  In furtherance of that purpose, all such laws and parts of laws codified herein, to the extent they relate exclusively to internal revenue, are repealed, effective, except as provided in section 5, on the day following the date of the enactment of this act.
Title 26 United States Code section 7851, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT C, states:
(a)	General rules
(1)	Subtitle A [Income Taxes]
Chapters 1, 2, 4, and 6 of this title shall apply only with respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending after the date of enactment of this title, and with respect to such taxable years, chapters 1 (except sections 143 and 144) and 2, and section 3801, of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 are hereby repealed.
The enactment of that law can be found at 26 Code of Federal Regulations section 1.0-1(a); a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT D, and states:
(a)	Enactment of the law.  The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 which became law upon enactment of Public Law 591, 83d Congress, approved August 16, 1954, provides in part as follows:
…
In general, the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 are applicable with respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending after August 16, 1954.
The applicability of the code only applies from December 31, 1953 through August 16, 1954.
March 9, 2005, the IRS, the DOJ had filed a motion with the Court, requesting that the Court amend its decision in Schulz.
June 29, 2005, the Court issued its much-anticipated decision regarding the government’s motion to amend the Court’s earlier ruling.  With a firm reliance on the Court’s primary role of protecting the People’s individual, unalienable Right to Due Process guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments, the Court soundly rejected the government’s pleading.
Writing for the three-judge panel, Judge Straub wrote, in part:
“…The government has moved to amend our per curiam opinion, reported at Schulz v. IRS, 395 F.3d. 463 (2nd Cir. 2005) (“Schulz 1”)….  Having considered the arguments of the parties, we grant the petition to rehear for only the limited purpose and to the extent necessary to clarify our prior opinion and hold that:  1) absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS Summonses “to appear, testify, or to produce books, papers, records, or other data,” 26 U.S.C. Section 7604, issued “under the internal revenue law,” id., apply no force to the target, and no punitive consequences can befall a summoned party who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order; 2) if the IRS seeks enforcement of a summons through the federal courts, those subject to the proposed order must be given a reasonable opportunity to contest the government’s request; 3) if a federal court grants a government request for an order of enforcement then any individual subject to that order must be given a reasonable opportunity to comply and cannot be held in contempt or subjected to indictment under 26 U.S.C. section 7210 for refusing to comply with the original, unenforced IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer’s reasons or lack of reasons for so refusing.
Most significantly, the Court held, relying on a 1920 decision by the United States Supreme Court, that the principles of due process apply to all administrative orders.  Declarant takes that to mean the Court’s order applies not only to IRS first party summonses but also to IRS third party summonses and to IRS levies and liens.
Accordingly, the EXHIBIT A notice is not a lawful notice; it is an administrative notice, as evidenced in Black's Dictionary 6th Edition, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT G-2, which defines notice, to wit:
Notice:
Information; the result of observation, whether by the senses or the mind; knowledge of the existence of a fact or state of affairs; the means of knowledge.  Intelligence by whatever means communicated.  Any fact which would put an ordinarily prudent person on inquiry.
A notice of intent to levy may be served on government employers regarding their employees as is evidenced in Title 26 USC 6331, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT W-2, which states to wit:
(a) Authority of Secretary
Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer employee, or elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 340l(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official. (Emphasis added.)
When, and by what procedures, did the Internal Revenue Service rule or decide that Declarant is an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, or the District of Columbia?  Declarant does not fit any of these descriptions.
Declarant is in possession of two letters from two Congressmen of the Unites States Dennis M. Hertel and E. Clay Shaw, Jr.; copies of both letters are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT U-6 and state to wit:
… Notice of Levy on Wages…Section 6331 IRC entitled “Levy and Distraint” and Section 6331(a) IRC entitled “Authority of Secretary” … does not provide authority to levy wages of private citizens in the private sector. … The omission of this section from IRS form 668-W may be misleading to some employers….”
“This particular provision does not appear to extend to private sector employees.  If a form was given to an employer that omitted section (a), this form could be considered misleading.”
In yet another letter from Congressman Grijalva of Arizona, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT BB-2, Congressman Grijalva states to wit:
Mr. _____ has provided my staff with documents that show that your agency has withheld part of his wages via an IRS order informing his employer of this action.  To do such an act, your agency should have a court order from a judge that would allow such an action to take place.  By ordering his employer to withhold a certain amount of his wages, your office is liable for civil action along with his employer for wrongfully garnishing his wages via the wrong procedural channels.
Title 26, USC 3401(d) gives the definition for employer; a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT V-3, and evidences to wit:
(d) The term employer embraces not only individuals and organizations engaged in trade or business, but organizations exempt from income tax, such as religious and charitable organizations, educational institutions, clubs, social organizations and societies, as well as the governments of the United States, the States, Territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, including their agencies, instrumentalities, and political subdivisions.
In addition, Title 26 USC 6332(a), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Z-3, evidences to wit:
Requirement.—Except as otherwise provided in this section, any person…
This section goes on in (f) to “Person defined”, and evidences to wit:
Person defined.—The term “person,” as used in subsection (a), includes an officer or employee of a corporation or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to surrender the property or rights to property, or to discharge the obligation.
Title 26, USC 7701(11)(c), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT C-4, evidences to wit:
(c) Includes and including
The terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in this title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined.
Declarant cannot find another definition of these terms (includes and including) within the code, thus leaving Declarant the definition found in Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Abridged Edition, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT D-4, evidencing “include” to wit:
To confine within, hold as in an inclosure, take in, attain, shut up, contain, inclose, comprise, comprehend, embrace, involve.  Term may, according to context, express an enlargement and have the meaning of and or in addition to, or merely specify a particular thing already included within general words theretofore used.  “Including” within statute is interpreted as a word of enlargement or of illustrative application as well as a word of limitation.
The above context (Title 26, USC 7701) does not express an enlargement or have the meaning of “and” or “in addition to”, leaving Declarant to rely upon the definition in EXHIBIT D-4.
Title 26, CFR 301.6331-1, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT E-4, evidences to wit:
(a) Authority to levy
(1)	In general. If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the tax within 10 days after notice and demand, the district director to whom the assessment is charged (or, upon his request, any other district director) may proceed to collect the tax by levy.
This is clearly referencing “any person liable to pay any tax”.  Declarant is not “liable to pay any tax”.

Declarant does not fit any of the above categories, leaving Declarant extremely confused as to how this unlawful EXHIBIT A notice could possibly be mistaken for a lawful document.
The definition for employee is given at Title 5, USC 2105, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT F-4, and evidences to wit:
(a)	For the purposes of this title “employee”, except as otherwise provided by this section or when specifically modified, means an officer and an individual who is-
(1)	appointed in the civil service by one of the following acting in an official capacity-
A)	the President;
B)	a Member or Members of Congress, or the Congress;
C)	a member of a uniformed service;
D)	an individual who is an employee under this section;
E)	the head of a Government controlled corporation; or
F)	the adjutant general designated by the Secretary concerned under section 709(c) of title32;
(2)	engaged in the performance of a Federal function under authority of law or an Executive act; and
(3)	subject to the supervision of an individual named by paragraph (1) of this subsection while engaged in the performance of the duties of his position.
The Explanatory Notes within this title evidence, to wit:
Subsection (a) is supplied to avoid the necessity of defining “employee” each time it appears in this title.  The subsection is based on a definition worked out independently by the Civil Service Commission and the Department of Labor and in use by both for more than a decade.
The above evidences that this definition is not solely for Title 5, USC 2105, but is used by Civil Service Commission and Department of Labor and has been used for more than a decade.  Again, Declarant does not fall into the categories listed above for either employee or employer.
The case of Given v. Cripe (Feb. 9, 1951) 187 F 2nd 225, evidences to wit:
Levy is not effected by mere notice.
The case of Freeman v. Meyer (May 28, 1957) 152 F.Supp. 383, further evidences, to wit:
A “levy” requires that property be brought into legal custody through seizure, actual or constructive, levy being an absolute appropriation in law of property levied on, and mere notice of intent to levy is insufficient.
At yet another cite, United States v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., D.C.Conn. 1942, 146 F.Supp. 30, 37, Judge Hincks observed that he could, to wit:
…find no statute which says that a mere notice shall constitute a “levy”.
This clearly shows that the court has rejected the EXHIBIT A collection notice. The EXHIBIT A notice is merely a collection notice, not a lawful document.
“In rem” action is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, abridged 6th Edition, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT U-4, and evidences to wit:
A technical term used to designate proceedings or actions instituted against the thing...
“Res” action is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, abridged 6th Edition, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT V-4, and evidences to wit:
...By “res,” according to the modern civilians, is meant everything that may form an object of rights, in opposition to “persona,” which is regarded as a subject of rights.
“Forfeiture” is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, abridged 6th Edition, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT W-4, and evidences to wit:
A comprehensive term which means a divestiture of specific property without compensation; it imposes a loss by the taking away of some preexisting valid right without compensation.  A deprivation or destruction of a right in consequence of the nonperformance of some obligation or condition. Loss of some right or property as a penalty for some illegal act. Loss of property or money because of breach of a legal obligation (e.g. default in payment).
Forfeiture of property (including money, securities, and real estate) is one of the penalties provided for under various federal and state criminal statutes (e.g. RICO and Controlled Substances Acts).  Such forfeiture provisions apply to property used in the commission of a crime under the particular statutes, as well as property acquired from the proceeds of the crime. See, e.g. 18 U.S.C.A. sections 981, 982, 28 U.S.C.A. sections 2461-2465 (criminal and civil forfeiture), 21 U.S.C.A. section 853 (forfeiture in drug cases).
Title 18, USC 981, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT X-4, evidences to wit:
(1)	The following property is subject to forfeiture to the United States:
A)	Any property, real or personal, involved in a transaction or attempted transaction in violation of section 5313(a) or 5324(a) of title 31, or of section 1956 or 1957 of this title, or any property traceable to such property.  However, no property shall be seized or forfeited in the case of a violation of section 5313(a) of title 31 by a domestic financial institution examined by a Federal bank supervisory agency or a financial institution regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission or a partner, director, or employee thereof.
Title 31 USC 5313, a copy of the first page of this Code is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Y-4, which evidences to wit:
Reports of domestic coins and currency transactions…
This title only applies to domestic financial institutions.
Title 31 USC 5324, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Z-4, evidences to wit:
Structuring transactions to evade reporting requirement prohibited.
This pertains to persons causing, or attempting to cause, a domestic financial institution to fail to file required reports.  Declarant has never done any such thing.
Title 18, USC 1956, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT A-5, evidences to wit:
Laundering of money instruments.
Declarant is not laundering money instruments.
Title 18, USC 1957, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT B-5, evidences to wit:
monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity.
Declarant is not involved with these types of activities.
Title 18, USC 981, see EXHIBIT X-4, also states in part (c), to wit:
Any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to a violation of section 215, 471, 472, 473, 474, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 485, 486, 487, 488, 501, 502, 510 ,542, 545, 656, 657, 842, 844, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1014, 1028, 1029, 1030, 1032, or 1344 of this title or any offense constituting “specified unlawful activity” (as defined in section 1956(c)(7) of this title), or a conspiracy to commit such offense.
All of the above cited Codes are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT C-5.  These Code sections are not applicable to Declarant.  Declarant is not involved in any of these activities.  What does Internal Revenue Service have posted on Declarant’s files that would cause this type of action by IRS agents?
Title 26, USC 7323, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT D-5, evidences to wit:
Judicial action to enforce forfeiture
(a) Nature and venue
The proceedings to enforce such forfeiture shall be in the nature of a proceeding in rem in the United States District Court for the district where such seizure is made.
EXHIBIT U-4, definition of “in rem”, shows that this proceeding is against the “thing”, not against Declarant.  Declarant’s copy of “Notice of Intent to Levy” is against Declarant (res), not “in rem” as is referenced in the above code.
Title 26, USC 7402, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT E-5, evidences to wit:
Jurisdiction of district courts
(a) To issue orders, process, and judgments
The district courts of the United States at the instance of the United States shall have such jurisdiction to make and issue in civil actions, writs and orders of injunction, and of ne exeat republica, orders appointing receivers, and such other orders and processes, and to render such judgments and decrees as may be necessary or appropriate for the enforcement of the internal revenue laws….
The two sections cited above specify the two specific forms of judicial action federal government has available when, and if, there is an act or omission contrary to internal revenue laws of the United States.  Even though any given Code section may give rise to an interest, the interest isn’t perfected until there is a judgment from a court of competent jurisdiction.  The interest is perfected via the judgment, but it dates to the act or omission that gave rise to the interest.
In Guardian T. & D. Co. v. Fisher (Jan. 2, 1906) the courts found to wit:
An individual may be under no obligation to do a particular thing, and his failure to act creates no liability, but if he voluntarily attempts to act and do the particular thing he comes under an implied obligation in respect to the manner in which he does it. 200 U.S. 57; 26 S. Ct. 186.
Declarant has never had any proceedings in rem or otherwise in any United States District Court.  This is a violation of due process rights to Declarant.  Furthermore, Declarant has created no liability by Declarant’s non-action.
Internal Revenue Manual 56(16)(18), a copy of this page is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT F-5, shows the coding for high-level drug dealers, and in (3) evidences to wit:
Collection activity reporting will be limited to seizure actions taken in connection with narcotics assessments which involve jeopardy or termination of taxable periods.
IRM 545(11).3(10) tells SCCB that if securities or negotiable instruments are received in response to an ACS-issued Form 668-A, Notice of Levy, they are to be sent to the district.
This shows a direct connection between Form 668-A, Notice of Levy, and narcotics assessments.  Declarant is not involved in narcotics activities.
Seizures are made pursuant to the police powers of the government.  The federal government has no authority to exercise police powers within the several states, which is in Title 28 appendix under Rule 64, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein as EXHIBIT L-3, and evidences to wit:
At the commencement of and during the course of an action, all remedies providing for seizure of person or property for the purpose of securing satisfaction of the judgment ultimately to be entered in the action are available under the circumstances and in the manner provided by the appropriate state law existing at the time the remedy is sought….  (Emphasis added.)
All property laws are state laws, and in order to deprive Declarant of Declarant’s property, Declarant must be afforded the protection of Declarant’s state laws, courts, and procedures as evidenced by the law above.  The only two circumstances where the federal government can deprive Declarant of property without a court order are as follows:
1.	If the property initially belonged to the federal government, or
2.	If the property is in the hands of a government employee or official.
Once again, this evidences that Declarant does not fall under any of the codes or laws that Internal Revenue Service is claiming Declarant has violated, because Declarant has no property belonging to the government nor is Declarant a government employee or government official.
Declarant has never received a copy of a court order that would make a seizure lawful, nor was a Notice of Seizure attached to or included with the EXHIBIT A notice that would make the EXHIBIT A notice lawful.  The EXHIBIT A notice that Declarant received does not contain a proper delegation order from the Secretary of the Treasury giving any particular agent the lawful authority to issue a collection action.
Internal Revenue Code, section 6502(b), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT U-2, evidences to wit:
(b)	Date when levy is considered made
The date on which a levy on property or rights to property is made shall be the date on which the Notice of Seizure provided in section 6335 is given.  (Emphasis added.)
Section 6335(a), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT T-2, evidences to wit:
As soon as practicable after seizure of property, notice in writing shall be given by the Secretary to the owner of the property….  (Emphasis added.)
Both of the above codes show that there must first be a “seizure”, followed by a Notice of Seizure in order to create a lawful levy.  These statutory requirements have seemingly been ignored by Internal Revenue Agents.  This is a direct violation of Title 26.  Declarant has not received a Notice of Seizure nor has Declarant had Declarant’s property seized.  Furthermore, Declarant has not even received an assessment.
Title 26, USC 7608(a), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT V-2, evidences to wit:
(a)	Enforcement of subtitle E and other laws pertaining to liquor, tobacco, and firearms
Any investigator, agent, or other internal revenue officer by whatever term designated, whom the Secretary charges with the duty of enforcing any of the criminal, seizure, or forfeiture provisions of subtitle E or of any other law of the United States pertaining to the commodities subject to tax under such subtitle for the enforcement of which the Secretary is responsible may-…
(b)	Enforcement of laws relating to internal revenue other than subtitle E
(1)	Any criminal investigator of the Intelligence Division of the Internal Revenue Service whom the Secretary charges with the duty of enforcing any of the criminal provisions of the internal revenue laws, any other criminal provisions of law relating to internal revenue for the enforcement of which the Secretary is responsible, or any other law for which the Secretary has delegated investigatory authority to the Internal Revenue Service, is, in the performance of his duties, authorized to perform the functions described in paragraph (2).
(2)	The functions authorized under this subsection to be performed by an officer referred to in paragraph (1) are-
…
(C)	To make seizures of property subject to forfeiture under the internal revenue laws.
This does not refer to Subtitle A income tax, but is referring to laws pertaining to alcohol, tobacco, and firearms.  As evidenced above only criminal investigators, not Revenue agents, have seizure authority and their authority is limited to “property subject to forfeiture”.
Title 26, USC 7301, gives a list of property subject to tax, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT G-4, and evidences to wit:
(a)	Taxable articles
Any property on which, or for or in respect whereof, any tax is imposed by this title which shall be found in the possession or custody or within the control of any person, for the purpose of being sold or removed by him in fraud of the internal revenue laws, or with design to avoid payment of such tax, or which is removed, deposited, or concealed, with intent to defraud the United States of such tax or any part thereof, may be seized, and shall be forfeited to the United States.
(b)	Raw materials
All property found in the possession of any person intending to manufacture the same into property of a kind subject to tax for the purpose of selling such taxable property in fraud of the internal revenue laws, or with design to evade the payment of such tax, may also be seized, and shall be forfeited to the United States.
(c)	Equipment
All property whatsoever, in the place or building, or any yard or enclosure, where the property described in subsection (a) or (b) is found, or which is intended to be used in the making of property described in subsection (a), with intent to defraud the United States of tax or any part thereof, on the property described in subsection (a) may also be seized, and shall be forfeited to the United States.
(d)	Packages
All property used as a container for, or which shall have contained, property described in subsection (a) or (b) may also be seized, and shall be forfeited to the United States.
(e)	Conveyances
Any property (including aircraft, vehicles, vessels, or draft animals) used to transport or for the deposit or concealment of property described in subsection (a) or (b), or any property used to transport or for the deposit or concealment of property which is intended to be used in the making or packaging of property described in subsection (a), may also be seized, and shall be forfeited to the United States.
The above cited laws evidence that seizures may be made of taxable property upon which tax has not been paid which is held ‘for the purpose of being sold or removed’, raw materials, equipment, packages, and conveyances used in the manufacture or transport of such taxable property.  Property subject to forfeiture does not include monies held by banks, employers, creditors, etc., which are due or owed to any individual.
The above laws evidence that sending a Notice of Intent to Levy and subsequent Notice of Levy as an actual lawful levy to any of these parties demanding the turnover of money for income tax is unlawful because it contains a false statement that a levy has been made when this is not the case because, again, no notice of seizure was sent as required by section 6335(a) in order to create a levy as provided in section 6502(b).
The case of In re Holdsworth (July 27, 1953) evidences to wit:
An actual or constructive seizure is essential to a valid levy and distraint; where, as here, the subject matter is an account receivable or chose in action, the seizure may be effected by a levy and the service of a warrant of distraint upon the debtor.  In re Holdsworth, 113 F. Supp. 878 (1953).
Declarant is unaware that Declarant has been “made liable for any tax”.  In reference to EXHIBIT W-2, 26 USC 6331, the wording “liable to pay any tax” evidences that Declarant must be made “liable to pay any tax”.  The United States Court of Appeals for the second circuit stated in the decision of Botta v. Scanlon, 288 F2d. 504, 506 (1961), to wit:
Moreover, even the collection of taxes should be extracted only from persons upon whom a tax liability is imposed by some statute.
This Court decision clearly shows that the only way Declarant can be made liable for any Internal Revenue tax is by means of some law (statute), which imposes a liability upon Declarant.  This fact was emphasized in the decision of Higley v. Commissioner, 69 F2d. 160, where the Court stated, to wit:
Liability for taxation must clearly appear from statute imposing tax.
Declarant is aware of various sections in the Internal Revenue Code that impose a liability for Federal taxes; however, Declarant is unable to find a code or section evidencing that Declarant has been made liable.  Once again, this has been extremely confusing to Declarant.
Title 26, USC 4401, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT H-4, evidences “Imposition of tax”; however, this code only covers wagers.  Declarant is not involved in wagering.
Title 26, USC 5005, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Y-2, evidences “Persons liable for tax”; however, this code section covers distilled spirits.  Declarant is not involved in distilled spirits.
Title 26, USC 5703, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT I-4, evidences “Liability for tax and method of payment”; however, this code covers tobacco and tobacco products.  Declarant is not involved with any tobacco or tobacco products.
Title 26, USC 1461, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT J-4, evidences to wit:
Every person required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter is hereby made liable for such tax and is hereby indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the amount of any payments made in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
The above quoted code evidences that the person made liable by the statute is the one who is required to “deduct and withhold”.  The only person required to “deduct and withhold” is evidenced in Title 26, USC 1441(a), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT K-4, which evidences to wit:
Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), all persons, in whatever capacity…having the control, receipt, custody, disposal, or payment of any of the items of income specified in subsection (b) (to the extent that any of such items constitute gross income from sources within the United States), of any non-resident alien individual, or of any foreign partnership shall deduct and withhold from such items a tax equal to 30% thereof….
Both USC 1441 and 1461 evidence that those who have control of money owed to non-resident aliens or foreign partnerships are required to deduct and withhold money owed to such foreign persons or foreign partnerships.  Declarant does not have control of money owed to non-resident aliens or foreign partnerships.
Title 26, USC 7343, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT L-4, defines person, to wit:
The term “person” as used in this chapter includes an officer of a corporation, or a member or employer or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
Declarant is not a “person” as defined above.  Only in the event that Declarant is in the status of “withholding agent” is Declarant liable for payment of income tax.  Declarant is not a withholding agent.
In the United States Supreme Court decision Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, the court ruled, to wit:
In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes, it is the established rule not to extend these provisions beyond the clear import of the language used or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters specifically not pointed out.  In case of doubt, they are construed most strongly against the government and in favor of the citizen.
This clearly shows that there can be no implied liabilities beyond that specifically stated in the statute.  In Botta v. Scanlon, mentioned above, the Court also stated, to wit:
It is equally well settled that the revenue laws apply only to ‘taxpayers’.
In the Botta v. Scanlon decision, it is further stated, to wit:
Plaintiffs may or may not be able to allege facts showing that Section 7421 is inapplicable to them.  However, a reasonable construction of the taxing statutes does not include vesting any tax official with absolute power of assessment against individuals not specified in the statutes as persons liable for the tax without an opportunity for judicial review of this status before the appellation of “taxpayer” is bestowed upon them and their property seized and sold.
Declarant has never received a “judicial review” or determination pursuant to Botta v. Scanlon that Declarant is bestowed the “appellation of taxpayer.”  If any such documentation applies please forward this information to Declarant immediately.
Title 26, USC 7701, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT M-4, defines ‘taxpayer’ to wit:
The term “taxpayer” means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.
Declarant has already evidenced that Declarant is not a “person”, see EXHIBIT L-4, and the Botta case clearly evidences that the term “taxpayer” applies to those made liable for a tax by law.  Declarant has never been made liable for any tax.
In Yick Wo v. Hopkins (May 10, 1886), the courts have stated to wit:
Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. 118 U.S. 356; 6 S. Ct. 1064.
The decision in the case of Long v. Rasmussen, Collector of Internal Revenue, et al, 281 F.236 (1922), further states, to wit:
The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection.  They relate to taxpayers, and not to non-taxpayers.  The latter are without their scope.  No procedure is prescribed for non-taxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law.
CFR 70.161, under Levy and distraint, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT N-4, evidences to wit:
(a)	Authority to Levy-(1) In general.  If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the tax within 10 days after notice and demand, the regional director (compliance) or Chief, Tax Processing Center who initiated the assessment….
In the Legal Reference Guide for Revenue Officers, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Q-3, under 313.5, Notice and Demand, evidences to wit:
(1) IRC 6303(a) says that a notice stating the amount of the tax liability and demanding payment of it shall be given to the taxpayer as soon as practicable, and within 60 days, after assessment of the tax.  (Emphasis added.).
Title 26, USC 6203, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Z-2, evidences to wit:
The assessment shall be made by recording the liability of the taxpayer in the office of the Secretary in accordance with rules or regulations prescribed by the Secretary.  Upon request of the taxpayer, the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer a copy of the record of the assessment.
Furthermore, assessments are activities where BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS has authority.  This is evidenced by the Parallel authorities Code of Federal Regulations, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT O-4, evidencing 27 CFR part 70, a copy of this is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT P-4.  Declarant does not understand why Declarant has been referred to this department when Declarant is not operating under BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS.
The court has, in Thomas v. Mercantile Nat. Bank at Dallas (June 18, 1953) 204 F. 2d 943, evidenced to wit:
Until the Commissioner certified the assessment list on August 17, 1945, there was no deficiency assessment, and no liability on the part of the taxpayer, and consequently nothing to pay.
Declarant is now requesting the assessment that has recorded the liability of Declarant.  Declarant was unaware that an assessment had been made, nor has Declarant ever received an assessment of any taxes as outlined above.
Internal Revenue Manual, Automated Non-Master File Accounting, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT Q-4, evidences to wit:
All assessments must be certified by signature of an authorized official on Form 23-C, Assessment Certificate.  A signed Form 23-C authorizes issuance of notices and other collection actions.
Without a certified Summary Record of Assessment, Form 23C, Internal Revenue Service has no authority to issue notices or take any collection actions against Declarant.  Declarant demands to see the certified 23C Summary Record of Assessment (not RACS).
The Legal Reference Guide for Revenue Officers at 313.1 Authority, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT R-4, also evidences to wit:
The authority to levy upon or seize property to collect delinquent taxes is contained in IRC 6331.  This is one of the strongest means available to collect a tax and, therefore, there must be full compliance with the conditions in IRC 6331.
Declarant states that Internal Revenue Service has not followed procedures as outlined above, nor has Internal Revenue Service applied the laws correctly as they are written, which is clearly in direct violation of Declarant’s rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.
To pretend that the EXHIBIT A notice is a lawful substitute for the correct procedure is deceitful.  To lawfully seize property from Citizens, Internal Revenue Service would need a court order from the relevant Court.
Internal Revenue Service, in order to lawfully seize Declarant’s property, must procure a Writ of Garnishment issued by a Superior Court, or it has no effect within the State.  For a County Sheriff to garnish Declarant’s bank account or wages, he needs a writ, as does the Internal Revenue Service.  For the EXHIBIT A notice to have the force of a writ, the Constitution guarantee of due process would first have to be abolished.  It would violate States’ Sovereignty over their internal affairs as guaranteed by the Constitution.  If a County Sheriff cannot seize property without a Court order, neither can the federal government, any of its officers or agents, or Internal Revenue Service.
Declarant demands a due process administrative hearing.  This is Declarant’s due process right under IRC 6331 and 6330.  Denying this hearing to Declarant is denying Declarant due process according to the Codes and regulations.  In this Due Process Hearing, you will be able to investigate Declarant’s allegations as guaranteed to Declarant by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Internal Revenue Code section 3102, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT T-4, evidences to wit:
Overview
The provision allows taxpayers to recover up to $100,000 in damages as the result of the negligent disregard of the Code or regulations by Service personnel.  This provision also amends section 7426 and 7433, regarding actions for wrongful levy, and allows third parties to recover damages up to $1,000,000 for reckless or intentional disregard of the Code or regulations, or up to $100,000 for negligent disregard of the Code or regulations….
Declarant has no documentation that specifically requires Declarant to file a form with DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.  The DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE and Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations 1320.6(a), a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT D-7, evidences to wit:
Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a valid OMB control number.
…no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that is subject to the requirements of this part if:  (1) The collection of information does not display … a currently valid OMB control number….
The EXHIBIT A notice gives collection information.  There is no currently valid OMB control number on the EXHIBIT A notice that gives the required collection information.  Declarant is not subject to any penalty as evidenced by the above law.
In addition, Declarant has reviewed Declarant’s records and files and can find no record or file that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE could rely upon to verify that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has legal, lawful authority or a legal, lawful claim against Declarant.  Please help Declarant update Declarant’s files and records by providing the following:
1.	A copy of the document or Form that Declarant is required to file with DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
2.	A copy of the 23C Certificate of Assessment, bearing Declarant’s name and Social Security Number and signed and dated by an official assessment officer, that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE must have in order to commence with collection activities.  NOTE:  A 006 RACS report will not be accepted as a 23C Certificate of Assessment.
3.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon for proper legal, lawful assessment procedures of Title 26, Subtitle A individual income tax.
4.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that Declarant is a taxpayer as defined in Title 26 of the Unites States Code and subject to Subtitle A individual income tax.
5.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that Declarant has unpaid taxes that are owed to DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
6.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has the authority to take any enforcement actions against Declarant without due process of the law.
7.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has the authority to add penalties to an amount before a legal, lawful assessment has been made known to Declarant.
8.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has the authority to add interest charges to an amount before a legal, lawful assessment has been made known to Declarant.
9.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has the authority to collect sums greater than appear on the summary record of assessment contrary to Title 26 United States Code 7214(a).
10.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has the authority to act outside the INTERNAL REVENUE CODE and INTERNAL REVENUE MANUALS.
11.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to establish a legal, lawful claim of liability against Declarant before a legal, lawful assessment has been made known to Declarant.
12.	A copy of the document(s) that DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE relies upon to determine that Declarant has “failed to pay”.
13.	A copy of the document(s) known as Form 17, Notice and Demand, required to be served before collection activity can begin.
Title 26 section 6331 under Levy and distraint, see EXHIBIT W-2, evidences to wit:
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand [Form 17], it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax….
Declarant has never received a 23C Certificate of Assessment, a Form 17 Notice and Demand, or any other documentation that is required to be served by the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE in regards to any allegations or presumptions in the EXHIBIT A notice.  How can Declarant neglect or refuse to pay when DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has not complied with Title 26 requirements?  Without the above documentation collection is not lawful and must stop.  Until the above documentation is produced any collection is in violation of Declarant’s rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.
Unless Internal Revenue Service can forward Declarant a certified copy of the 23C Assessment Certificate and the signed court ordered judgment that pertains to Declarant, Internal Revenue Service cannot establish a basis for sending or applying any collection notices to Declarant.  If you cannot do so, please certify your lack of documents on Form 3050, Certificate of Lack of Records.  In the event that you lack authority, Declarant demands that Internal Revenue Service send letters of correction to the parties to whom Internal Revenue Service mailed any of these unlawful documents.
Declarant is demanding relief.  Commissioner, one of your agents has improperly, recklessly, intentionally, negligently, and with disregard to the laws and Codes violated the laws and Codes to serve some purpose.  Declarant believes that this agent may be unlawfully seeking cash merit pay awards, as outlined in Internal Revenue Manual, Handbook of Delegation Orders, page 1229-91, a copy is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as EXHIBIT B-4.  Commissioner, you are responsible for your agents, at least one of whom has recklessly and intentionally disregarded the Codes and regulations.  You will be responsible for their actions and you will be responsible for any unlawful proceedings that this may be creating by the blatant disregard of the Codes and regulations.  Declarant has clearly evidenced the negligence of the Codes and regulations in this letter.  It is now up to you, Commissioner, to inform all of your agents to act in accordance with the Codes and regulations as they are written.
Declarant is requesting any lawful information you have to support the EXHIBIT A notice be forwarded to Declarant immediately.
Declarant believes that Internal Revenue Service is malfeasant in its duty to apply the Codes and regulations as written and regulated.
Declarant is not a tax protester or tax resister.  Declarant will, upon receipt of the proper documentation as outlined above, fill out and file any forms as well as pay any taxes for which Declarant has a legal, lawful liability.
DECLARANT IS DEMANDING A DUE PROCESS HEARING BEFORE FURTHER COLLECTION ACTIVITY COMMENCES.
If you disagree with anything in this letter, then rebut that with which you disagree, in writing, with particularity, to Declarant, within 30 days of the date this letter is signed, and support your disagreement with fact, evidence, and Constitutionally-based law or case law.  Your failure to respond, as stipulated, is your agreement with and irrevocable admission attesting to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal, and lawful, fully binding upon you in any court of America, without your protest, objection, or that of those who represent you.  If you submit a rebuttal, please ensure that your rebuttal shows clearly an authorized signature along with the authorized signor’s printed name, title, and federal employee number.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
First M. Last	Date
Statement
state of State	}
	}
county of County	}
BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the ______ day of __________, __________, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of State, personally appeared, First M. Last, who proved to me to be the same individual who executed the within instrument, and affirmed that he/she/they are/is personally fully aware of the contents and accuracy of the statements made therein, and affirmed that the document is, to the very best of his/her/their knowledge, true and correct.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed My Official seal the day and year last above written.
Notary Public for _________________________________
Commission Expires on _____________________________
Exhibits on CD available on request.